Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Hence, why good unmarked cruisers would be helpful, to see what I saw and Marquisse, at least would clean up a lot of stupid driving.

beleafer81 wrote: I dont do a full on hard break check, but theres no law against doing it. But someone may get injured..

HTA - there is a charge if no brake lights

CC - dangerous driving (situational pending)

ok, made my way thru the dreadful GTA today....phew...in one piece...freaking crazy out there....every 5th person yacking with a cellphone (not hands free)...2 with maps across their wheel, 4 writing while driving, one with an IPAD......too many people not moving to the right (including those in the centre lane that should move over too), thus ...

http://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/article/793087--testing-drivers-on-roads-less-travelled

Brett Popplewell
Staff Reporter
BANCROFT—They come here by the carload: would-be Toronto drivers, chauffeured to the edge of Algonquin Park by Toronto driving schools that, for a fee, help them take their road tests on some of the loneliest byways ...

Tired of the hearing the squirrels squeal?

Want that big car noise and remain environmentally friendly and save fuel?

here is your answer.....we have all been searching for....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9XAC-BvUyo[/youtube]

Court Officer realized you did not receive disclosure in a timely fashion, therefore told the Crown and Crown just had the charge withdrawn to save another court date and arguement of delay, only to have a JP quash the offence. Saved court time and yours!

copied over from duplicate thread that is locked...

This is to let anyone know that if you are tickted for following too close by aircraft fight the charge. For my case, speed was never an issue only the observation from the aircraft to the ground unit to stop me for FTC. If you look at the last post from me anjs1224, you can read my story to see ...

please stay on the one thread....at...
http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com ... ght=#12401

this thread locked...I copied over your above comment
HB
Moderator

Think you are getting a little mixed up with things here....

If you have a conviction from the HTA or Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act (CAIA) that will go onto your driver's licence, failing to pay the fee or were suspended that will affect your licence. This is from a conviction is registered by the courts and the courts notify the MTO who ...

You mentioned to let the higher ups in the OPP know about this, do you know whom I could contact and get actual results?

Call the detachment the officer is based out of (probably either Downsview or Aurora) and ask to speak to a Staff Sergeant. Any problems, ask for an Inspector. If I were in your shoes, I'd discuss the interaction with the tow ...

the stunt has nothing to do with "squealling of tires" but rather.....

Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to cause some or all of its tires to lose traction with the surface of the highway while turning

- has to intentionally lose traction while turning

I think through the use of photos I could prove that the signs are not visible from 60m but does that even matter?

Yes it does. If the signs are not visible from 60m away, they are not enforceable.

Pending, there is an excemption for the 60m rule too.

Plus, if the driver was able to see the stop sign and come to a stop, they would have seen ...

http://www.thelaw.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9069
USA stuff = N/A, completely different court system, laws, procedures etc.

it does require objective evidence combined with the relevant factors at play that day (the general speed of the vehicles, the conditions of the road and weather, and the amount of traffic on the road at the time ...

FyreStorm wrote:I don't think any JP will convict for a 1 second of squealing, that can be as you all described above, VS the guy who lays a 100 m long patch leaving the Tim's while his buddies cheers him on.

That would be utterly stupid....everyone knows we are always there

rather than slow driving, there could have the use of lanes section updated...unless actively passing (within 50m front or back of vehicle being passed) a vehicle shall keep to the right.

- with the above added, make it an offence to pass to the right of any vehicle.

this would allow faster moving vehicles on the left and give someone moving back ...